Member review

[svx-biker]

For me the most silly thing is that I don't know WHO submitted the request. In cartouche I could check the surroundings and sometimes found that the report was from someone who did quite some work but just was locked out on the major roads. On the other hand UR from world_xxx users had to be seen from another angle

Now I have no way to communicate with the user reporting as I don't know who it was.

[dknight212]

Is that to avoid confusing users with problem resolved emails?

To avoid Wazer frustration when they don't see their 'poofed' mapped fixes showing up in the Application for weeks and keep opening more Update Requests for something that was already fixed in the editor.

'We' are not used to suffering for such an extended time without updated map tiles on the client!

Waze could really make it clearer if they just adjusted the wording of the Update Request solved emails. It's a couple minutes work for an Intern at Waze to update the damn email. But no...

It does make you wonder what they are working on at the moment, if they haven't the time to do this. It had better be good!

[harling]

Waze could really make it clearer if they just adjusted the wording of the Update Request solved emails. It's a couple minutes work for an Intern at Waze to update the damn email. But no...

It does make you wonder what they are working on at the moment, if they haven't the time to do this. It had better be good!

It makes me wonder why Waze doesn't avail itself more of the vast resources at their disposal in the Wazer community. They have a handle on "crowdsourcing" when it comes to GPS tracks and map editing, but when the time comes to wordsmith an eMail or track down a bug in the client, they seem oblivious to the many talented native-language writers--and software engineers--who would be glad to volunteer their time & talent.

[DonJ2]

If waze staff had to deal directly with this issue, I'll bet they would have resolved it by now. It's unfortunate that they don't seem to take advise from those that actually do the work (resolving URs) for them.

Waze, are you listening, we're trying to help you?

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk

[gettingthere]

Waze had previously stated that their Marketing department needs to approve the working of the Update Request emails. Maybe Waze Marketing is the roadblock? Or is it just that Waze does not understand the importance of getting the wording in the Update Request email more clear so that their users are not frustrated?

Could be that it's just that Waze does not know when the map will be updated in the US/Canada and doesn't know how to communicate this in the emails?

[bgodette]

Waze. Seriously. Take a look at how Google Map Maker works.
Then abandon the whole map editing game and exit gracefully.

The whole point of unreviewed edits is the immediacy of problem resolution- and I bought into that.
But right now, not one US edit since mid January have been visible to the users.

Your editor craps out, you keep (3 times) bullshitting about when updates will be published, and worse, you are emailing the users with "Poof! Problem solved!".

By comparison, every single one of my edits on Google Maps in that time have been reviewed, professional and courtous feedback given, and published on reference quality maps.

You suck.

#1 wazer in New Jersey 2012.
Area Manager.

Disillusioned? I nearly fell of my unicorn !

what's wrong with gmaps peer-review.jpg (51.33 KiB) Viewed 210 times

And here's an example of why Google Maps sucks. Downing St in reality goes straight N/S from 18th to 22nd, and has since late summer 2011. Perfectly valid and correct edits from some local user are undone by a Google Reviewer to match the outdated aerials. I've got more examples around here too, and of course they all have to do with construction where roads have been added, removed, or moved.

Both systems have their problems, and there's no ideal solution.

[gettingthere]

And here's an example of why Google Maps sucks. Downing St in reality goes straight N/S from 18th to 22nd, and has since late summer 2011. Perfectly valid and correct edits from some local user are undone by a Google Reviewer to match the outdated aerials. I've got more examples around here too, and of course they all have to do with construction where roads have been added, removed, or moved.

Both systems have their problems, and there's no ideal solution.

Although the original editor gets an email on how the edit was processed and they can then provide more details on why the approval is wrong and eventually get it corrected, no?

I agree with you that no solution is perfect. But there certainly has to be a better security model than how the Waze Map Editor security is being handled now. Do you think that a forum full of 'Unlock Requests' is better? How many edits have not occurred at all because the enthusiastic new community editor is blocked from making the map edit/improvement and they just give up?

[bgodette]

Although the original editor gets an email on how the edit was processed and they can then provide more details on why the approval is wrong and eventually get it corrected, no?

I'm wholly unfamiliar with what happens with an Anonymous or logged in account edit that is undone later.

I agree with you that no solution is perfect. But there certainly has to be a better security model than how the Waze Map Editor security is being handled now. Do you think that a forum full of 'Unlock Requests' is better? How many edits have not occurred at all because the enthusiastic new community editor is blocked from making the map edit/improvement and they just give up?

I'm pretty sure you know my views on this by now and that that was for the benefit of the audience. But yes Waze does need a different security model, and given the direction they're going with tile processing and the new editor, it basically will have to become some sort of hybrid peer-review system. I'm still unsure about their intention to link editing rank to road importance (road volume) will work as they think it should as IMO it will overly restrict a new "more local" user for dealing with updated conditions on their daily commute vs the not-so-local AM/CM/Ranked.

[gettingthere]

I'm still unsure about their intention to link editing rank to road importance (road volume) will work as they think it should as IMO it will overly restrict a new "more local" user for dealing with updated conditions on their daily commute vs the not-so-local AM/CM/Ranked.

Yes, if this new security model works as we think it may, this is going to make it even more difficult for new editors to participate since there may no longer be the ability for higher ranked editors or Area Managers to enable the lower ranked editors to process the edits themselves (the current, super efficient, Unlock Request via forum post). It may turn off even more new editors and pile more work on the editors who have the experience and rights.

And if Waze is also planning to lock down the abilities of Area Managers where they can no longer edit every road type in 'their' area, the complaining is going to get really loud, really quickly.

[Twister_UK]

Could be that it's just that Waze does not know when the map will be updated in the US/Canada and doesn't know how to communicate this in the emails?

Perhaps something simple like "The map problem you reported on xx/yy/zz has been fixed and will appear in the next map update"? Giving users any sort of hint that the fix won't appear immediately should help, even if Waze can't give them a more specific timeframe.

Thinking about the issue from the editing side of the fence, it would be useful if we could mark URs as unresolvable if they require a third party to edit their data - e.g. bad routing to postcodes - since leaving such URs open doesn't seem right (the user who submitted the UR thinks they're being ignored, and may end up resubmitting the same UR over and over again...)